Existence Of God/Aquinas/Maydole

[Lightkeeper]

Aquinas' Third Way is a cosmological argument for the existence of God which "is taken from possibility and necessity." It is surprising therefore that philosophers of religion have not shown much interest in applying modal logic to its analysis. (1) There are a couple of reasons. First, Aquinas does not always use the words 'possibility' and 'necessity' in the same way that they are used in modal logic. Second, cosmological arguments generally purport to build a bridge between some property of this world and a supreme being, making it unnecessary, it might be thought, to appeal to modalized features of other possible worlds. Maydole

Aquinas states the Third Way as follows:

The third way is taken from possibility and necessity and runs thus. We find in nature things that are possible to be and not possible to be, since they are found to be generated and corrupted. But it is impossible for these always to exist, for that which can not-be at some time is not. Therefore, if everything can not-be, then at one time there was nothing in existence. Now if this were true then even now there would be nothing in existence, because that which does not exist begins to exist only through something already existing. Therefore if at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to have begun to exist; and thus now nothing would be in existence -- which is absurd. Therefore, not all beings are merely possible, but there must exist something the existence of which is necessary. But every necessary thing has its necessity caused by another, or not. Now it is impossible to go on to infinity in necessary things which have their necessity caused by another, as has already been proved in regard to efficient causes. Therefore, we cannot but admit the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God. (4)

20th WCP: Aquinas' Third Way Modalized

Do Aquinas and Maydole prove the existence of God?

[metis]

Originally Posted by Lightkeeper

[url=http://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Reli/ReliMayd.htm]
Do Aquinas and Maydole prove the existence of God?

Not at all. I have quite thoroughly read Aquinas and what he presents is a philosophical model of what he referred to as "the immoveable mover" (God). His essential arguement is that there must have been something that causes all but has no cause in and of itself. That sounds nice, but it simply doesn't stand up to even elementary scrutiny.

One problem is that the premise violates itself in stating that everything must have a cause but God doesn't. How is that even remotely logical? If ALL must have been caused then ALL must have a cause-- including God. To state that God has no cause violates the entire premise.

So what caused all? In science, as I mentioned on another thread, we work on the basis of evidence. What evidence do we have of a theistic cause? Even though some people have a rather vivid imagination, the reality is that most admit that we cannot accept God or Gods on the basis of objective evidence, but only through faith. With faith, evidence is simply not needed.

So, if there is/are no creator-god(s), what could have caused our universe? It is at least concievably possible that matter/energy could have existed back into infinity and may exist forward into infinity. And, by their nature, energy/matter are always in a state of change according to the evidence we actually can see. IOW, everything appears to change-- nothing appears to stay the same. Our universe may well be part of a multiverse, the natures of which go back into infinity with no ultimate "beginning".

Does the above somehow "prove" there is/are no god/gods? Of course not. Therefore, all possibilities should remain open.